Same Sex Marriage the Debate About Same

¶ … Same sex marriage

The debate about same sex marriage has brought about a lot of controversy from all quarters. It has elicited debates in religious circles, secular and traditionalists. Many people who are against this kind of union argue their case from a religious perspective; some enjoin morality to it concerning homosexuality.

In this context I would like to distance my argument and come out clearly that I don't discriminate people on grounds of their sexuality, since I have a strong conviction that we are all equal and should all enjoy equal right and benefits. I am worried however by the deification we want to include in the institution of marriage that is including same sex couples as married people this am concerned since my argument is based on a marriage which a social institution symbolizing the reproductive human relationship.

Since time immemorial the institution of marriage has been central in the formation of the human race. It creates the values that govern and regulate the passage of human life from one generation to another through a basic unit commonly known as a family which is made up of a man and a woman, this two people comes together create a life and nurture it.

Culture precisely is what marks us as human; it is the distinguishing factor makes its honorable to differentiate ourselves from other animals and, in the future, from intelligent machines or robots. In the past, we used religion as an important forum and force in the foundation of culture we upheld this by finding shared values through religion. That is not possible in a secular society of these times, which results in complicated situation to find consensus on values.

To form a society, we must create a societal-cultural paradigm the collection of values, principles, attitudes, beliefs, and myths, through which we find values which give meaning to life, for us individuals and the society in general. In establishing this paradigm all human societies have to focus on the two great events of every human life: birth and Death. By doing so we realize that Marriage plays central role of the cultural values, attitudes, and beliefs that surrounds birth. We require a culture related to birth in a secular society, at least as much as in a religious one, and must establish it through secular means this can be achieved through the legal recognition of marriage.

Basing on the symbolism and respect for the transmission of human life it is obvious or rather sad to include same sex couples in the definition of marriage since this will not only destroy the procreative relationship of opposite sex pair bonding but also alter the sole institution that establishes rules that govern procreation .

The primary reason in my opinion for marriage is reproduction in which all humanity bases their faith on. An intimate relationship between two people should recognized but not on its own sake or the partners involved but for the purpose of the procreative relationship that recognizes the transmission of human life that results in the well being of a family which should be promoted and protected.

Advocates of some sex marriage argue that all of us should admit or agree that marriage is an intimate relationship between two people and to act in a manner to exclude those who believe in this that is same sex -- couples amounts to discrimination for this I can agree that they are correct if marriage purposefully is a union to protect an intimate pair-bond.

But they are surely wrong if and when the purpose of marriage is to protect, the inherently procreative relationship of opposite pair-bonding with purpose of procreation.

Therefore to include same sex couples as a marriage union it waters down the symbolism and protection of procreative relationship ruled out by marriage the pair bonding of opposite sex.Same sex -- marriage advocates may also argue that restricting marriage to opposite sex couples who do not or do not want to have children are to be excluded from marriage or to the worst .extend only couples who are fertile should be allowed to marry.

My argument however is that a union of people of opposite sex symbolizes the reproductive potential that exists at a general level between a man and a woman, even though this people don't get advocate for child bearing, their marriage does not go contrary to the general symbolism of marriage since the reproductive capacity of a man and a woman is assumed at a general level rather than in individual cases since the privacy of every individual must and should be respected.

All of us should recognize that the fundamental purpose of marriage is for the purpose of respect to the transmission of human life, the exclusion of same sex-couples from the institution of marriage is not related to the individual s sexuality (homosexual orientation ), or to them as individuals or their relationship s this exclusion is related to the fact that their union is not inherently procreative and if we join institulization and symbolism of marriage as a union that transmits life, therefore to do this we will eliminate this function as marriage.